HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
in every matter where the common 
interests of both countries were 
concerned, the British legislature 
had a right to interfere. He ad- 
mitted, also, the advantages which 
Treiand had enjoyed, under the 
auspicious reign of his present ma- 
jesty. But why should it be for- 
gotten, that, notwithstanding all the 
generous liberality which the Irish 
had experienced from their sove- 
reign. there was still a part of the 
boon unbestowed ? Was the house 
to be informed that the catholics 
of Ireland insisted on their right of 
being elected members of the le- 
gislature, on the ground, that if 
they had some of their body in 
parliament, the persecutions which 
have existed would not have taken 
place ? But here, perhaps, it would 
be said, that he was speaking of 
persecutions as vaguely as he had 
done of discontents ; and that the 
one had as little foundation as the 
other. He knew, however, no 
fewer than ninety-one house-holders 
who had been banished from one of 
his own estates, after being plunder- 
ed of their property, and some of 
them wounded in their persons. 
Of the existence of discontents he 
enumerated many proofs of the same 
kind with those that had been stated 
by the earl Fitzwilliam. 
The earl of Guildford could not 
admit that ministers had shewn any 
attention to the interests of [reland, 
 sinee the recall of the earl Fitz- 
william. If the advice proposed 
was not necessary to the king, of 
whose paternal care for his people 
he entertained no doubt, it was 
highly requisite to his ministers. 
The earl Spencer was of » pinion, 
that, if lord Moira meant to do any 
suistantial good by his motion, he 
ought to have gone much farther, 
Vor. XXX1X, 
¢ 
(241 
and pointed out not only the nature 
of the discogtents of the Irish na- 
tion, but the kind of measures 
which ought to be resorted to for 
removing them. _ 
The marquis of Lansdowne said, 
that; 4f the present was a subject 
of delicacy, ministers were the 
cause of it. There was nobody 
less inclined to question, or to in- 
fringe upon, the independence of 
the Irish legislature than he was ; 
but there was a great difference 
between infringing dpon that inde- 
pendence and acting in their capa- 
city, as the great hereditary council 
of the king. The docitine, which 
ministers had held forth, he was in-’ 
clined to think, was much more 
calculated to foment jealousiés be- 
tween the two legislatures than the 
motion of the noble lord, were it 
carried into effect. Che lord-lieu- 
tenant of Ireland, as a minister, was 
accountable to the British as well 
as to the Irish parliament ; and, 
therefore, they had a right to watch 
ove; the measures of his administra- 
tion, and to censure or adyise him 
as they might deem proper. The 
noble secretary had entered into a 
pompous and elaborate* display of 
the advantages which Ireland had 
enjoyed under the reign of the pre- 
sent king. But he would ask him 
whether the immunities which had 
been granted to Ireland had not 
been tuily justified by the conse- 
quences; and that, too, after they 
had been refused by their own legis- 
lature? [t was in the recollection of 
almost every nobie lord, that, when 
@ petition was presented to the Irish 
parliament, by a numerous and re- 
spectable body of that kingdom,the 
prayer of itwas rejected, with some. 
thing little short of indignation; but 
when deputies were sent over to 
[Rj this. 
